[Passed] Expediting Discussion Periods

Cormac · Post by **Cormac** » Wed Feb 15, 2017 3:45 am

I agree with Adytus that it should be the Chief Scribe, not the Pharaoh, who can expedite discussion. Adding the additional check that he has to have the assent of the Pharaoh seems reasonable.

Treize Dreizehn · Post by **Treize Dreizehn** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:14 pm

I don't really think having a waiver for discussions is healthy. The motivation for a minimum discussion period is that it gives us pause and lets us remove emotion from lawmaking and decision making. If there's a mechanism to bypass it, we run into some serious issues of stuff being done in the heat of the moment that we'll regret later. Additionally, I can't think of any serious issues that would strongly benefit from such a waiver.

Reducing it to 48 hours is fine, but any mechanism to reduce the wait time to zero, regardless of how many checks you put on it feels like the wrong move.

Cormac · Post by **Cormac** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 11:41 am

I didn't feel strongly about it, so I didn't object, but I do basically agree with Douria. What, conceivably, is going to come up that will be so pressing that we can't discuss it for a couple days before voting on it?

The only thing I can even think of is a declaration of war, and trust me when I say from personal experience: Not something to rush.

Post by **Adytus** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:35 pm

I'm not sure, I just know it was brought up on discord at some point. I am fine with just dropping the discussion period to two days. I think the option was brought up around the time when a proposal was rushed through, and vetoed. We were considering actually giving the CS the option if needed.

Wymondham · Post by **Wymondham** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 3:11 am

I motion to vote

Post by **Adytus** » Tue Feb 21, 2017 8:48 pm

bogieoone wrote:Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:11 amI motion to vote

I don't think we are ready to go to vote with this.

Wymondham · Post by **Wymondham** » Wed Feb 22, 2017 8:14 am

Adytus wrote:Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:48 am
bogieoone wrote:Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:11 amI motion to vote
I don't think we are ready to go to vote with this.

I agree and withdraw my motion to vote

Post by **Adytus** » Thu Feb 23, 2017 1:59 pm

bogieoone wrote:Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:14 pm
Adytus wrote:Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:48 am
bogieoone wrote:Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:11 amI motion to vote
I don't think we are ready to go to vote with this.
I agree and withdraw my motion to vote

Thank you!

* pokes Wrek *

Dalimbar · Post by **Dalimbar** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 1:03 am

I'm in agreement with Adytus. I'd rather see the minimum debate requirement be lowered to 48 hours, but certainly encourage discussion after the voting has commenced.

EDIT - The irony of me posting belatedly in this thread now amuses me.

Post by **Adytus** » Sun Apr 02, 2017 11:37 am

(6) A minimum discussion period of two days, beginning at the time a proposal is submitted, will be required before any proposal may be brought to vote. After a motion to vote has been made and seconded in accordance with procedure, the Chief Scribe and their legislative deputies may delay a vote for up to seven days.

Here is the simply edit we discussed. I've updated the OP with it. If anyone does not have a problem, I motion to vote.